Jus’ Bekoz: Deciding his own best team

Rick Kozlowski

Sports Editor

rkozlowski@journal-news.net

Someone doesn’t like the regional alignment for the state boys basketball tournament.

Where have we heard that chorus before?

It was inevitable that someone was going to question the system again. It used to be an annual thing about “getting the best teams to Charleston.”

That music had quieted somewhat ever since the West Virginia Secondary School Activities Commission about a decade ago retooled the system to determine the final eight qualifying teams for the final three rounds of play in Charleston — a way to “get to best teams to the Civic Center Coliseum.”

In it, a loss in sectional play didn’t necessarily void a team’s chance of reaching Charleston for what is typically called the “state tournament,” even though the playoffs, sectionals and regionals, are actually part of the state basketball tournament.

The winners of two regional games among the four regions advanced to Charleston, in essence getting the so-called most-worthy teams to the showcase in the state capital.

That system continues.

However, when the SSAC completed a major alignment overhaul to start the 2016-17 school, it included a reduction of Class AAA teams to 29 while the lower two divisions both expanded in membership.

It’s much fairer in terms of school populations as opposed to a previous system that divided each class in fairly equitable chunks.

The tournament with its new beginning takes on a largely different look.

For instance, in Class AAA, there is a three-team section involving teams from the Eastern Panhandle — Hampshire, Jefferson and Washington, but the eastern area’s Class A section includes East Hardy, Harman, Moorefield, Paw Paw, Pendleton County, Tucker County, Union and West Virginia School for the Deaf — eight teams.

Add in the region, and Class AAA, Region II includes a total of seven teams, with the four schools in Berkeley County making up the other half of the region.

The other section in Region II in Single-A includes seven more teams for a total of 15 — more than half of number of schools in all of Class AAA.

Because of West Virginian’s quirky geography, the result of the Civil War and its aftermath, and the shifting population centers, like to the Eastern Panhandle, there’s no easy alignment in any of the classes. The current alignment of regions might be a display of gerrymandering at its finest.

He told WVMetroNews in a story last week, “It’s a shame that us or Beckley (Woodrow Wilson) or Capital or (George Washington), no matter how you work it out, two of us will be sitting at home (for the games in Charleston),” Herbert said.

His premise for inclusion of more than a pair of teams in Charleston is because he thinks they are four of the best squads in West Virginia and happen to be from the same region.

The last state poll by The Associated Press ranked all four of them among the top eight teams in the Mountain State, so there is some validity to his argument if we adhere to the premise of getting the best teams there.

They might well be four of the best teams in what seems like a class that has no overwhelming favorite. The poll has been all over the map this season during different weeks.

So, too, Herbert’s South Charleston squad lost to Musselman earlier this season, and the Applemen also defeated fellow Region III member Princeton twice this season.

No other regions II and III teams met this season.

Herbert suggested the tournament change to seeding teams from 1-29 and playing the postseason that way. He means Triple-A, the other two classes be damned.

That, of course, doesn’t take into account how the tournaments of the lower two divisions would be played.

You could play two different types of tournaments — one for AAA with a totally seeded event and another for AA and A that is guided by the current region system — but that wouldn’t go over well with the lower classes. Somehow, that would probably lead to a Title IX challenge.

And, let’s be frank, the SSAC isn’t going to approve of different tournaments.

Yes, totally seeded tournaments featuring 1 through whatever the number statewide would be great.

It’s not going to happen for travel reasons, for one, and, two, the SSAC, rightfully, works to avoid boys and girls competing with each other on playing dates.

Could you imagine trying to schedule that?

With the boys and girls tournaments separated by a week, with the girls going first, even the regional games for boys aren’t held on the same day as the girls are playing in each lower division. For instance, the Class A state tournament might have all of its first girls games on a Wednesday, so that means the Class AA boys play their regionals that night. When the Double-A girls play on Thursday, the Single-A boys regionals take place on that night.

There’s no conflict.

Which is how the Region II seedings hopefully were determined in voting that took place on Saturday — no conflict — even though boys teams can play regular-season games for one more week. Voting early makes no sense to determine seedings before the regular season actually ends.

The one nice thing for Region II — the Eastern Panhandle — is that for the next four school years is that two local teams will advance to Charleston.

However, there is still that nefarious seeding process of voting, how coaches in the regions to rank the teams, voting 1 through whatever the number, rather than making determinations strictly from results from actual games.

Apparently, baseball will be under the same system in the spring, as opposed to seeding teams based on real results as has been the procedure for a long time.

Locally, voting this season could — and should — have be completed strictly based on standings in the Eastern Panhandle Athletic Conference. Because six of the seven teams in the region belong to the league, and Hampshire, which has one win and can easily be disposed to seventh in the voting, there should be no question that standings should determine how the teams are aligned for the postseason.

Real simple. No voting required.

Follow the Yellow Brick Road right to the actual standings.

But we’ve seen in the past how some coaches locally have tried — and succeeded — to tilt the pairings in a team’s favor by voting the group in some bizzare fashion. It’s happened before.

Coaches can’t hide their votes, as they are available publicly once the state tournament is complete.

It could be interesting to see how each one voted.

Let’s see how their votes match up to the standings in the conference.

When the pairings are announced Tuesday, here’s how they should be:

In Section 1, Martinsburg should get the top seed, even though the Bulldogs split regular-season games with Musselman for their only league and sectional loss for team. Musselman won by three points in one game) and lost by 22 in the other, so there’s a tiebreaker that puts the Applemen second. Hedgesville should be third because its only regional losses are to both Martinsburg and Musselman — twice each. Spring Mills, which beat none of its Berkeley County rivals, is fourth.

In Section 2, Hampshire is third without an argument, but both Jefferson and Washington split their regular-season games. Based on the head-to-head points differential Washington wins out by one point. The Patriots beat Jefferson by five points and lost by four.